100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Order in just viewed list? | |
|---|---|
|
|
 spelling hasn't stopped some of them...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no game, too much game, too shy, tongue tied, shoes untied,
or jus plain wacky. not enough booty, too much booty. or don't like peas. usually just looking for intimate encounters. with no strings. bad match you see....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 that's quite a list...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
slows the resident pro
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think it's in order of when they viewed you, I think it's in order of IQ.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think it's in order of when they viewed you, I think it's in order of IQ. idk if i should be at the top or the bottom then...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
katrina as a matter of fact you are near the top of my list now
but it keeps changing. but i am not pro i just like to have fun.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
katrina as a matter of fact you are near the top of my list now but it keeps changing. but i am not pro i just like to have fun. haha. the top better be the good half...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
you are second from the top for some reason although i am pretty sure you are the most recent to read my profile. you did read it didn't you!!??
so we'll just wait and see what it means later. i'll email them you know. they cant get away with this!! at any rate you don't seem too lame on the uptake so i'd venture you are in the "good" half. Lex, I don't think it is IQ though...you just get all the smart chicks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
you are second from the top for some reason although i am pretty sure you are the most recent to read my profile. you did read it didn't you!!?? so we'll just wait and see what it means later. i'll email them you know. they cant get away with this!! at any rate you don't seem too lame on the uptake so i'd venture you are in the "good" half. Lex, I don't think it is IQ though...you just get all the smart chicks! S1ow -- This must be some new meaning of the word "smart," of which I have previously been unaware! If they were REALLY smart....well, uh, you know....!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
haha. thanks s1ow!
did i "read" it? um... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
haha. thanks s1ow! did i "read" it? um... Hey, you're on mine, too! I think we have a spy!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sorryz! hahaha. i just like knowing how old everyone is...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can someone like Lex who has everyone in the world looking at his profile, (smart and not so smart) tell me why the # keeps going up and down, with no change in the faces I see?
I am down two this morning, but I can detect no change. Why is that? And why does the # of views not skyrocket as everyone looks at my profile? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
s1owhand
on
Tue 12/18/07 05:19 AM
|
|
that's an easy one. it only keeps track of who has looked the last 30 days. every day some expire to be replaced with new ones who may look. if you are very inactive then your expiration rate exceeds your new view rate and your number of recently viewed declines....
interestingly it also gives you a means for tracking average views per day over a months period...once you've been around long enough i.e. > 1 month at least. a steady 30 recent views indicates an average of one per day, 90 is 3/day etc... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
that's an easy one. it only keeps track of who has looked the last 30 days. every day some expire to be replaced with new ones who may look. if you are very inactive then your expiration rate exceeds your new view rate and your number of recently viewed declines.... interestingly it also gives you a means for tracking average views per day over a months period...once you've been around long enough i.e. > 1 month at least. a steady 30 recent views indicates an average of one per day, 90 is 3/day etc... When I first signed up here, the system was a little different. It used to be that "who viewed me" would show everyone who looked at your profile, regardless of gender. Later, they adjusted it, so now it only shows the people who match the stated gender preference in your settings. So, for example, mine only shows the female stalkers, and the male stalkers will remain forever anonymous. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
switch hit from time to time Lex - i won't tell on ya.
very revealing...  and well yes, smart is subjective - ahhh the good old days before gender <filtering> & the monthly expiration began....hey, isn't someone in the know or a site owner going to explain this to us? where are the memos? where are the faqs!?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
switch hit from time to time Lex - i won't tell on ya. very revealing... and well yes, smart is subjective - ahhh the good old days before gender <filtering> & the monthly expiration began....hey, isn't someone in the know or a site owner going to explain this to us? where are the memos? where are the faqs!? What am I all of a sudden, Captain Jack Harkness? Nah, I'm a little too addicted to the 23-year-old Italian girls to switch teams now.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
those are bold and borderline reckless assertions! i will have to check profiles this instant! there is a disturbance in the local force - and by local - i mean LESS that 658,000 miles... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
those are bold and borderline reckless assertions! i will have to check profiles this instant! there is a disturbance in the local force - and by local - i mean LESS that 658,000 miles... The scientifically accepted figure is 897,000 miles -- I checked with Stephen Hawking -- but it doesn't actually apply in this one instance, so I guess that's OK, then.... |
|
|
|
|
